Comments on: Campus Construction Update: June 2, 2014

By: Monthe Kofos '11

Monthe Kofos '11 — Sun, 06 Jul 2014 01:41:28 +0000

While I am all for new construction at �ֲ��ý, I must say that I am not very impressed with the exterior of these new dorms. They look very institutional, and lack the defining charm of the other residencies.

My main problems:
1. Lack of pillars (heck, even 280 has them)
2. A building that could be interchangeable with any building at BU or Harvard or any other Boston college. Not unique to �ֲ��ý in its design (excluding materials)
3. Very boring to look at. 280 is much more interesting and dynamic to the eye.

Hoping these might be addressed. Especially the lack of pillars!

By: Charles J. Updegraph

Charles J. Updegraph — Fri, 04 Jul 2014 19:04:15 +0000

Sorry but the dorms look industrial and not in keeping with the style of most buidings on the campus. The last two dormitory villages are much more attractive and should be used as a model for the design of the proposed dorms.

By: Dave Kitendaugh '05

Dave Kitendaugh '05 — Tue, 01 Jul 2014 13:45:09 +0000

to sterile. looks like a hospital.

– Dave

By: Alfred

Alfred — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 18:16:53 +0000

I agree with the sentiments expressed by Dick, Erik, and Kim. That the architects seek to emulate elements of the dormitory located at 280 College Street is concerning to me as that building lacks character and is often referred to as hospital or hotel like, for its institutional feel. Its broad and undetailed brick faces miss the mark in eliciting the “homey New England Feel” that older buildings such as Chase, Roger Williams, and Hedge Halls’ possess. Instead it feels somewhat austere and foreign. I sincerely hope that the College will not make the same mistake twice and be stuck with yet another brick eyesore.

By: Palo '12

Palo '12 — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 15:30:23 +0000

‘A necessity in our increasingly soggy future, rain gardens are also planned that will manage storm runoff in a somewhat natural way…’

Soggy future – did we pay for a climate study on this project too? This seems like an up-sell by the architects and builders – a normal tie-in to the sewer will suffice.

By: Kris Jonsson '08

Kris Jonsson '08 — Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:42:25 +0000

I do not mind the architecture, but I think the building footprints are too large resulting in a very ‘institutional’ impression. Personally, I think the building on Campus and Central could remain the way it is planned. For the other block I truly would prefer to keep the two old houses (and trees!) on 63 and 53 Campus Ave and add the residential block ‘behind’ them. It would produce a more eclectic vibe and would respect the human scale of the liberal arts campus.

By: Israel Piedra '12

Israel Piedra '12 — Sun, 08 Jun 2014 18:37:10 +0000

I think the renderings look OK. But I hope that �ֲ��ý does not model the interiors after the New Dorm at 280 College. Too sterile looking. �ֲ��ý should learn its lesson after the attempted switch from the Den to Milt’s in New Commons. New, bright, and “modern” doesn’t beat cozy and comfortable.

By: Dick Kilbourne '67

Dick Kilbourne '67 — Sat, 07 Jun 2014 13:54:10 +0000

Sad. I never thought I’d wish for the resurrection of Alonzo J. Harriman. These buildings lack charm – part of what makes �ֲ��ý the school it is. I am reminded of a 1960’s middle school.

By: Erik Bertelsen'72

Erik Bertelsen'72 — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:52:00 +0000

Must say these pictures of the now dorms look pretty institutional and without much character. Just my opinion.

By: Kim Williams

Kim Williams — Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:51:44 +0000

I think the notion that by introducing hardscape “students will be encouraged to linger in the green space” is a flawed one. The current streetscape has a verdant suburban quality to it and the proposed buildings present one that is very institutional looking and out of character with the old part of the campus and the streetscape. It also looks as if the terrain is being leveled and flattened. A more organic building form that emerges from its landscape and existing topography, rather than just occupying it, would be much more conducive to “lingering.”

Even better would be the preservation of the existing houses and the introduction of new construction behind them in a way that retains the tree canopy, natural terrain and quality of the streetscape.